Conservation of Historic Designed Landscapes

& the English Planning System

Jonathan Lovie

Morrab Gardens, Penzance: A late 19th century public park designed by Reginald Upcher of Poole which is included on the Register of Parks and Gardens at Grade II (Photo: Jonathan Lovie)

The study of ‘garden history’ is a relatively
new discipline. The term itself, like
the frequently used short-hand ‘parks
and gardens’, fails to recognise the dynamic
nature of the subject, and the constantly
evolving understanding of the various
landscape types which make a significant
contribution to England’s cultural heritage –
and indeed, to European and world culture.

In order that designed landscapes of all
types, from the great landscape parks such as
Stowe or Petworth, to public parks, cemeteries
and even institutional landscapes, that have
a special or national significance should be
easily recognised, the 1983 National Heritage
Act empowered English Heritage to compile
a Register of ‘parks, gardens and other land’.

THE REGISTER OF PARKS AND GARDENS OF SPECIAL HISTORIC INTEREST

The initial Register was compiled in the mid-1980s
and revised in the late 1990s.
The designation now comprises over 1,600
designed landscapes which are nationally
significant, and new sites continue to be
added as and when they are identified.

In order to merit inclusion on the Register,
and in order to ensure a consistency within the
designation, a site must demonstrate through
its historic development and interest, its
design and integrity that it meets one or more
of English Heritage’s criteria for designation.
To this extent it is important to remember that
the Register is a highly selective designation,
and only those sites which are assessed to be
of national significance will be included.

While all landscapes designated on
the Register are of national significance, it
is obvious that some will, by their age,
rarity or perhaps design interest, be of
greater significance than others. In order
to reflect this, designated landscapes are
graded at Grade I, Grade II* and Grade II.

Grade I landscapes will be those
considered to be of international significance
(such as Stowe, Blenheim or Highgate
Cemetery); Grade II* sites are those which
are of exceptional national significance (such
as Godolphin in Cornwall or Crystal Palace
Park in London); and Grade II sites are those
considered to be of national significance. The latter includes a diverse selection of
landscape types, ranging from country
house gardens to sites such as the garden
developed by the sculptor, Dame Barbara
Hepworth, at her studio in St Ives, Cornwall.

Stoke Poges Gardens of Remembrance, Buckinghamshire: A 1930s commemorative landscape included on the Register at
Grade I (Photo: Jonathan Lovie)

The Boringdon Arch near Plymouth is a Grade II* listed structure designed by Robert Adam, standing above a scheduled
ancient monument, and is integrally linked to the historic and aesthetic development of the adjacent Grade II* designed
landscape at Saltram (Photo: Jonathan Lovie)

The Register of Parks and Gardens forms one of the suite of national
designations applied to the historic
environment, alongside listing for
buildings, scheduling for archaeology,
and the Register of Historic Battlefields.

Under the programme of Heritage
Protection Reform introduced by the
labour government all historic environment
designations are being brought together
within the new National Register. This move
will help to emphasise the way in which the
different elements of the historic environment
are frequently inextricably linked: for
example, a registered landscape may form the
designed setting of a listed country house, and
may contain a scheduled feature which was
incorporated into the landscape design; and
the whole might form part of the setting of an
historic battlefield. The historic development,
interest and therefore significance of each
one of these features is thus clearly related,
and to some extent dependent upon,
the significance of the other features. It
therefore follows that a development which
impacts adversely on one element of the
historic environment may have an impact
on the overall significance of that site.

These reforms do not affect the widely
varying levels of protection which apply
to the different types of heritage asset.
Thus scheduled monuments continue
to enjoy the greatest degree of statutory
protections, closely followed by listed
buildings. Registered designed landscapes,
however, remain without any additional
statutory control or protection, as before.

In order to seek to protect important
designed landscapes from the adverse impact of change, other ‘tools’ within the
planning system must therefore be deployed,
such as the listing of built structures
and the scheduling of other features.

PPS5: NEW GOVERNMENT POLICY

Although the labour government’s proposals for
a new heritage protection act are unlikely to be
fulfilled by the new coalition, one key element
of their proposals was achieved in March 2010,
just before the election: PPS5 was issued.

Planning Policy Statement 5: Conservation
of the Historic Environment, to give it its full
title, replaced two former policy documents,
PPGs 15 (Planning and the Historic Environment)
and 16 (Archaeology and Planning), effectively
unifying control over all ‘heritage assets’. Listed
buildings and scheduled monuments are
now ‘designated heritage assets’, as are world
heritage sites, protected wreck sites, registered
parks and gardens, registered battlefields
and conservation areas. PPS5 thus provides
the new unified framework within which
planning applications affecting nationally
designated landscapes must be determined.

The PPS makes several radical departures
from previous guidance, the first being its
emphasis on understanding the ‘significance’
of the heritage asset, which it defines as; ‘The
value of a heritage asset to this and future
generations because of its heritage interest. That
interest may be archaeological, architectural,
artistic or historic’. This concept thus neatly
embraces all historic assets, including parks
and gardens, and ties in the terminology of
its parent act, the Planning (Listed Buildings
and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, which refers
to ‘special architectural or historic interest’.

Furthermore, some degree of
protection is extended to all heritage
assets, whether designated or not:

In considering the impact of a proposal on any
heritage asset, local planning authorities should
take into account the particular nature of the
significance of the heritage asset and the value that
it holds for this and future generations. (HE7.4)

If there is any doubt of the implications
of this for a planning application
affecting a historic park or garden
that is not included on the statutory
register, Policy HE8 is even clearer:

The effect of an application on the significance
of such [an undesignated] heritage asset
or its setting is a material consideration in
determining the application. (HE8.1)

This does not mean that the Register of
Parks and Gardens is now redundant, as the
much stronger wording used in relation to
designated assets in policy HE9 makes clear:

There should be a presumption in favour of the
conservation of designated heritage assets and
the more significant the designated heritage
asset, the greater the presumption in favour of
its conservation should be. … Substantial harm
to or loss of a grade II listed building, park
or garden should be exceptional. Substantial
harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of
the highest significance, including scheduled
monuments, 14 protected wreck sites, battlefields,
grade I and II* listed buildings and grade I and
II* registered parks and gardens, World Heritage
Sites, should be wholly exceptional. (HE9.1)

Warstone Lane Cemetery (Grade II) in the Birmingham Jewellery Quarter conservation area makes a significant contribution to the special historic interest and character of that place and,
through its collection of funerary monuments, reflects the historic development of the surrounding area. (Photo: Jonathan Lovie)

PPS5 is considerably shorter than either
of the two PPGs it replaces. It achieves this
by focussing on the principles rather than
the detail and, in particular, on fostering an
understanding of the impact of a proposal
on the significance of the heritage asset:

Local planning authorities should require
an applicant to provide a description of the
significance of the heritage assets affected
and the contribution of their setting to that
significance. The level of detail should be
proportionate to the importance of the heritage
asset and no more than is sufficient to understand
the potential impact of the proposal on the
significance of the heritage asset. (HE6.1)

The general philosophical approach
of PPS5 clearly corresponds well to the
more ‘holistic’ approach to the historic
environment emerging from Heritage
Protection Reform. However, delivery of
this more informed approach to planning
for the historic environment will require
significant investment of resources: owners
and developers will have to be willing to
invest in appropriate professional advice;
local authorities will need to invest in their
historic environment services in order
that appropriate levels of information are
available; and the external expert advisers,
the statutory consultees, will almost
inevitably find that their workload increases
as more detailed scrutiny of the nuances of
development proposals will be required.

STATUTORY CONSULTATION ON HISTORIC DESIGNED LANDSCAPES

Government Circular 9/95 sets out the
requirement for planning authorities to consult
The Garden History Society and English
Heritage on planning applications affecting
nationally designated designed landscapes:

The Garden History Society must be
consulted on applications affecting any
registered landscape, regardless of grade

English Heritage must be consulted
on proposals which affect Grade I
and Grade II* registered sites.

Additionally, English Heritage may comment
on proposals which affect Grade II landscapes,
for example where the landscape forms the
setting to a highly graded listed building, or
where there are wider policy implications.

Although sometimes criticised for
introducing an element of delay into the
determination of planning applications,
statutory consultation provides planning
authorities with an essential opportunity to
acquire additional expert guidance which
is often unavailable ‘in house’. It is also
an important element in the process of
democratic scrutiny of development proposals.

In order to streamline the application
process, and to minimise the potential
for delay once an application has been
submitted, it is important that planners
encourage applicants to follow best practice
and engage in as wide-ranging pre-application
discussions as possible. Such discussions
should certainly involve the appropriate
statutory consultees, and ideally should
also involve relevant national and local
amenity societies and other ‘stakeholders’.

LOCALLY DESIGNATED DESIGNED LANDSCAPES

Not all designed landscapes which are
important to local communities, or which help
to create a particular sense of place or local
distinctiveness, will meet the high criteria for
national designation; and there are many sites
which have been identified through English
Heritage’s Register Review Programme as
being of potentially national significance
but which have not yet been assessed for
inclusion on the Register of Parks and Gardens.

Such sites, although falling outside
the remit of national designation, clearly
merit identification within the planning
system in order that the impact of potential
change may be correctly evaluated before
permission is granted for development.
Already many local authorities include a
Local List of locally or regionally significant
designed landscapes within their Local
Development Framework. Such lists need
to be robust and ideally supported by a
definitive map and a statement setting out
why the site is considered to be significant.

PPS5 places much greater emphasis on
the importance of such sites, and actively encourages local authorities to identify places
which are significant for their communities
within the planning system. In addition to
the base list within the LDF, it is envisaged
that supporting evidence will be gathered
within the county’s Historic Environment
Record (HER), a much expanded form of
the old Sites and Monuments Record. The
HER thus becomes an essential repository
of data to be consulted by anyone with an
interest in the historic environment, and a key
element in the reformed planning system.

There is an increasing number of counties
developing Historic Environment Records
providing on-line resources to owners,
developers and the wider community.

CONSERVATION AREAS AND DESIGNED LANDSCAPES

Designed landscapes are often crucial
elements in the historic and aesthetic
interest of a particular locality. It therefore
follows, especially in urban areas, that
many conservation areas will include, or be
closely associated with, a designed landscape.
Examples might include an early 19th
century residential development surrounding
communal gardens or an urban square
(Calverly Park, Tunbridge Wells – Grade II); a
cemetery or burial ground serving a particular
community (Key Hill Cemetery, Birmingham –
Grade II*); or a public park with associated
residential development (Crystal Palace
Park – Grade II*). The same principles of
association will apply equally to nationally
designated designed landscapes, and those
which have been identified on the local lists.

Durlston Castle near Swanage in Dorset is a remarkable late 19th century didactic landscape which is included on the
Register at Grade II. A blanket tree preservation order coupled with a raft of natural environment designations has prevented
the appropriate management of trees within the designed landscape leading to the loss and erosion of important designed
views which form part of the special historic interest and character of the site. (Photo: Jonathan Lovie)

While the connection between designed
landscapes and conservation area designation
is perhaps more frequent and obvious in
the urban context, there are rural situations
where landscape designation and conservation
area designation work together. An 18th or
19th century model village, for example, may
form an integral part of the development
of a designed landscape. In the case of the
Milton Abbas conservation area in Dorset, the
village was designed by Lancelot ‘Capability’
Brown and Sir William Chambers in the
late 18th century, and is integrally linked
to the evolution of the Grade II* designed
landscape associated with Milton Abbey which
is nearby. While the village is not included
within the registered site boundary of the
designated landscape, it forms an essential
element of its setting and features in a key
designed view from within the landscape.

Conservation area designation extends
the scope of protection to include the
demolition of unlisted buildings within
the area through the need for conservation
area consent, and it introduces protection
for trees. Specific alterations to houses
may also be introduced through Article 4
designations. Designation thus offers
greater control over many of the historic
assets comprised within it. It is a locally
accountable and highly democratic designation,
and it is thus a particularly appropriate
tool for seeking the conservation of both
nationally and locally designated designed
landscapes and, crucially, their settings.

It is clear from PPS5 that the
Government’s intention was to promote the
greater use of conservation areas, and from
the perspective of historic designed landscapes,
whether nationally designated or not, this is
very much to be welcomed and encouraged.

CONSERVATION OF HISTORIC PLANTING WITHIN DESIGNED LANDSCAPES

Inclusion of a landscape on the Register of
Parks and Gardens does not bring with it
any additional statutory control. It follows,
therefore, that the planning authority does not
acquire any control over changes to historic
planting within that site unless any proposed
change requires planning consent. Thus
it is possible for the owner of a registered
garden, for example, to remove an Arts and
Crafts topiary garden completely, even if
that feature made a significant (or, indeed,
the principal) contribution to the site’s
special historic interest. The only exception
would be if the removal formed part of a
development scheme, or if the site fell within
a conservation area, or the topiary trees
were covered by a tree preservation order.

In this situation, the conservation area
designation offers a much more appropriate
and flexible framework for conservation and
management than the tree preservation order.
The conservation area designation is predicated
on an understanding of those elements
which contribute to the special historic and
aesthetic interest of that place, and its sensitive
interpretation will allow for appropriate
management of trees and larger shrubs.

The same is often not the case with
planting subject to tree preservation orders
(TPOs), especially where these are applied
on a blanket basis. Indeed, such a designation
can, ironically, be a disincentive to appropriate
management, with the result that over time
the proliferation of weed species and scrub
leads to a significant diminution of the special
historic interest and character of the designed
landscape through, for example, the erosion
of designed views. TPOs are thus a very
blunt weapon which should be used with
great discrimination and only in situations
where other designations more appropriate to
historic designed landscapes cannot be applied.

THE FUTURE

At the time of writing we are at a point both
of great potential, and of great uncertainty.

PPS5 offers an exciting prospect for a
more unified and informed approach to
managing the historic environment, with
challenging opportunities for all involved
within it to demonstrate an understanding
of what makes a particular place ‘special’
and why it merits conservation, and to
what extent it may merit preservation.

However, the new coalition government’s
proposals for the protection of England’s
historic environment remain unclear.
Furthermore, the huge economic uncertainties
facing the country over the next few years call
into question the ability of either national or
local government to deliver key elements of
the new system. It is clear that far from being
revenue neutral the new system will require
significant investment from developers, local
authorities and the statutory consultees. In
the context of significant public spending
cuts, central government is unlikely to
provide, and with the present system already
stretched, ‘efficiency savings’ seem inevitable.

While it may not be possible to deliver the
entire reform programme in the short or even
medium term, at least we now have some key
elements of a system to which we can aspire.

Historic Gardens, 2010

Update, September 2012
Recently there have been several significant changes in UK government planning guidance and policy.

In England Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Conservation of the Historic Environment (PPG15, 1994) and Planning Policy Guidance Note 16: Archaeology and Planning (PPG16, 1990) have been cancelled by the Government. Initially replaced by Planning Policy Statement 5 (PPS5) in March 2010, current policy guidance for England is now given in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) issued in March 2012. Further guidance is proposed, but in the meantime the guide which originally accompanied PPS5 remains in force - see PPS5 Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide.

In Scotland the principal statutory guidance on policy is now Scottish historic environment policy (SHEP), which was published in December 2011, with subsidiary guidance given in Historic Scotland’s Managing Change leaflets. These documents together replace the Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas published in 1998.

Author

JONATHAN LOVIE has been an historic
landscape consultant since 1994. Between
1998 and 2002 he was retained by English
Heritage as a Consultant Register Inspector.
Since 2002 he has been the part-time
Principal Conservation Officer and Policy
Advisor to The Garden History Society, and
continues to practice as a private consultant.

This article has been updated by Cathedral
Communications, including a new
section entitled ‘PPS5: New Government
Policy’, in response to developments that
occurred after the article was written.